Mel Morris interview on Radio Derby 1pm

[Archie]

8 minutes ago, CornwallRam said:

Yes, but only £8m of it could be included in the P&S calculation.

Far better to buy Alvaston Rangers for £50, and then buy Tom Lawrence for £70m (no transfer window in non-league)

Sounds like the plan. Then loan him back you mean? 

[CBRammette]

4 minutes ago, angieram said:

Then they should stop the self-righteous indignation when it all goes tits-up! 

Sorry Angie usually agree 100% but the directors have legal duties to run the club correctly not try and appease fans and ego. They are running a company with all that entails as well as keeping within your sports own rules. Our situation shows perhaps why a fan shouldnt run their club as they cant separate the two. I doubt Mel would have gone on a similar reckless spree spending at his other companies

[G STAR RAM]

1 minute ago, Tombo said:

Could also be true. I don't think either of us know for sure.

He is of course free do to what he likes with his own stadium but the club would probably be punished heavily for the year we should have failed P&S but didn't because of the stadium

We have already been cleared of any wrongdoing in relation to the ground sale.

[Tombo]

Just now, G STAR RAM said:

We have already been cleared of any wrongdoing in relation to the ground sale.

Yes because they disputed the valuation. For us to buy the stadium back, there's no way the EFL will allow us to receive it for less without punishment

[atherstoneram]

2 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

If you had any information that the club was heading for administration then it should have been disclosed and maybe other posters would have taken you seriously?

To most you are just a poster on a football forum and what you say will hold no more weight than other posters opinions. 

I wish I had taken your concerns more seriously (not that I think I could have helped do anything about it) but I make no apology because, as I pointed out at the time, your approach to the matter was completely wrong.

'I know something but won't tell you' is never going to get people on your side I'm afraid.

Would it have made a difference if they had disclosed it,the MM lovers on here would just have laughed at them and accused them of having a vendetta against MM

[Van der MoodHoover]

3 minutes ago, Carnero said:

Don't know if anyone has replied as I'm wading through this thread.

I believe the implication MM gave was that they were negotiating one penalty for all of the outstanding years (3 years ending 2018 (4 points), 2019 & 2020), so as not to be hit with a double punishment for the same restatement exercise.

2019 was always expected to be a fail given the restatement with 2020 & 2021 likely to be a pass once chunks of the big amortisation hits have worked their way back into the 3 years ending 2018 & 2019.

Ah right.... I had assumed that we were just on the restated years that were the subject of the decision panels deliberations, but if we're rolling into the next few years then that's new news..... 

....if not good news ?

[CornwallRam]

2 minutes ago, Archie said:

Sounds like the plan. Then loan him back you mean? 

You'd have to wait until January, and potentially the end of the embargo...so 2038

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, Tombo said:

Yes because they disputed the valuation. For us to buy the stadium back, there's no way the EFL will allow us to receive it for less without punishment

Because the valuation was found to be fair. 

There would be absolutely no reason for the EFL to investigate if we bought the ground back for a lower price.

It would be like investigating teams for buying players for less than they are worth.

[Norman]

6 minutes ago, Miggins said:

@Norman! You cynic! I read it as 'that's the question I've been asking myself'.?

Being cynical gets you nowhere on here. 

Which is why I'm cynical. 

[G STAR RAM]

3 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

Would it have made a difference if they had disclosed it,the MM lovers on here would just have laughed at them and accused them of having a vendetta against MM

Saying things like 'MM lovers' just makes you sound silly I'm afraid.

[jono]

32 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

Only one of these points was not known to him when he decided to invest in Derby County. If he didn't like it he should have kept the lid on the biscuit tin. Truth is, simples, he gambled big and it didn't come off. You may have a view on whether the gamble was worth it but the fact it didn't come off had got three bits of nothing to do with television revenues.

But how many of his detractors now were the ones saying “Uncle Mel” .. “pay what it costs” .. “yeaaarrr we got our man” .. “genius attracting Lampard” .. “Wayne ducking Rooney” etc etc etc 

He has effed up big time. His legacy is failure, reckless foolishness, lousy decision making, misplaced trust and dire, desperate uncertainty. No equivocation.

but he wasn't and isn’t the 3 amigos and there are a lot of folk spitting bile on here that need to look at their own changing views over his tenure. 

[atherstoneram]

Just now, G STAR RAM said:

Saying things like 'MM lovers' just makes you sound silly I'm afraid.

Really,truthful perhaps but not silly,how many on here hung onto every word MM said.

[NottsRam77]

38 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

All the damage was done in the two weeks we signed about £20m of players on long contracts that we then sold for next to nothing. Everything after that has been accounting aimed at avoiding the impact of those decisions. If Blackman had gone on to be a twenty goal a season striker nobody here would have a bad word to say. I'd argue the club could be forgiven for getting one signing wrong but the fact that all five, or six, didn't work or shows either extreme bad luck or some pretty appalling scouting and governance.

Rush .. rush … rush .. and his connections .. to his wasserman group 

Edited September 19, 2021 by NottsRam77

[Spanish]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

Just another thing I picked up on.

MM said the 17/18 accounts show an FFP overspend of £4m and therefore a 4 point deduction. 

Why not just submit them accounts and take that point deduction now.

If they want to also charge us for later years let them go ahead and go through due process again.

This time we would know to have an accountant/auditor as an expert witness.

 

There are rollover 3 year periods that he did not mention, one season does not breach P&S.  

[Spanish]

1 minute ago, atherstoneram said:

Really,truthful perhaps but not silly,how many on here hung onto every word MM said.

I can't understand the affection for a guy who has handed us to admin where there is a possibility of liquidation.  I am sure some want to build a statue of him in front of PP which he is about to rename Mel's Monument to Failure

[Norman]

15 minutes ago, Archie said:

Sounds like the plan. Then loan him back you mean? 

Oh duck no. He stays there. 

Edited September 19, 2021 by Norman

[G STAR RAM]

4 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

Really,truthful perhaps but not silly,how many on here hung onto every word MM said.

Yeah really. 

[atherstoneram]

Just now, Spanish said:

I can't understand the affection for a guy who has handed us to admin where there is a possibility of liquidation.  I am sure some want to build a statue of him in front of PP which he is about to rename Mel's Monument to Failure

Neither can i  but because as alluded to in an earlier post, it's Uncle Mel,One of our own etc. etc. I't doesn't matter he has run the club into the ground

[ossieram]

2 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

Really,truthful perhaps but not silly,how many on here hung onto every word MM said.

Just because some disagree with some of your views on MM, it doesn't make them a MM lover. 

I saw the way Lionel Pickering was treated and slated by some of our fans and some of the comments about MM were very similar,  I find it hard to join in with slagging off, but I'm a Derby fan, not a MM fan.

[Archie]

8 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Because the valuation was found to be fair. 

There would be absolutely no reason for the EFL to investigate if we bought the ground back for a lower price.

It would be like investigating teams for buying players for less than they are worth.

I'm not sure that's true if the price was significantly different as there is a perceived market value. Due to the shenanigans with the stadium sale first time around I'm sure they'd look into it as a matter of course - and I think they'd be right and entitled to. Especially as the stadium sale was used to show we hadn't breached ffp by that much.